Internal Second Opinion on Pathology

Options
farmerlucy
farmerlucy Member Posts: 3,985
edited October 2015 in IDC (Invasive Ductal Carcinoma)

If you're like me you may have questions about your initial diagnosis. I finally got brave enough to start the process for a second opinion on my pathology. Yeah, I know, what part of Let It Go do I not understand. Anyhow I just decided to call the pathology department directly to see how to get my specimen sent to Johns Hopkins. The secretary was so incredibly helpful and told me how to go about it. As I explained my questions (confirmation of grade and a second dimension on the tumor). She said that they have six pathologists and they could also do a review of the original slides internally. A hour later the head MD of the department called me! He had already looked at the slides, said he'd make the same grade call, and gave me a second dimension on the tumor (three is not possible). My point in posting this is if you have your own questions you may be able to speak to or arrange a consult with your pathologist.

· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • peggy_j
    peggy_j Member Posts: 1,700
    edited October 2015

    Wow, interesting. Good that they were able to do a review internally and that the head doc called you himself. I heard that all patients' cases are reviewed by the "tumor board" (or "cancer board"?), comprised of cancer experts with different specialties, so it's possible more than one pathologist previously looked at it? (???) Are you still considering getting an external review? I've heard that's the preferred method for second opinions of any kind. Since it's been a few years since your Tx, I'm wondering...what would you do differently now if the pathology results came back different?

    BTW, congrats that the original review was correct!

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • farmerlucy
    farmerlucy Member Posts: 3,985
    edited October 2015

    No - I'm satisfied. My oncotype is incongruent w k1-67 and grade. If I was bumped down to grade 1 I would for sure do only five years of HT. The main thing the second dimension answered was that it appears the 1.1 x .9 x .8 enhancing mass at my pre-biopsy MRI was in fact not a false positive since the mass they found microscopically was 1.1 x 1.0 x ? in the same area of the breast. At least it restores my faith in MRIs. The more I learn the
    more I understand just how virtually impossible it was to see anything in those old extremely dense breasts. In my first onc visit my onc said "it was hiding". She was 100% correct.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Categories